Bullshit.

That quote is based on the (false) premise that privacy is there to conceal illegal/shady activities. It puts you in one of two groups; You're either guilty of something and have a reason to hide it, or you're not guilty and have no reason to hide anything. It doesn't include the possibility that you might not be guilty of something but may still want to keep something hidden. I'll give you an example. You might NOT want to give your phone number when you register on some social website because you don't want that data used for marketting purposes.

Yes, Schmidt showed a complete lack of understanding of why anonymity is still often a necessity online. Do we really need to keep going over the examples that clearly show he is wrong?

I got the impression that by doing "it" he meant searching Google for it, not actually doing it. I think most people realise that Google works by tracking what you search for, so it makes sense that if you want something to remain unknown, you shouldn't search Google for it.

With the exception of "stealth" startups? ;)

I hope the smiley is sarcastic?

I was being sarcastic people.

I am not sure I follow your logic here...

Either you are being sarcastic, or idiotic. Please tel me which one.

I was being sarcastic here.

Ah, I think I missed the ;) last night!

Thanks